Page 57 - Effective group discussion theory and practice by Adams, Katherine H. Brilhart, John K. Galanes, Gloria J

40 Chapter 2

businesslike relationship. Patterson found that group members making collective
54
(group) decisions sit closer together and in more of a circle than when making indi-
55
vidual judgments. Stacks and Burgoon discovered that closer distances (18 inches)
make group members more persuasive and credible than distances of 36 or
54 inches. 56
What is a comfortable distance varies from one individual or one culture to
another. In South America, southern and eastern Europe, and Arab countries, people
prefer to stand close, whereas in northern Europe, North America, and Japan, people
57
prefer more space. In fact, members of Arabic cultures feel reassured when they
stand close enough to be able to smell their conversational partners. Westerners, how-
ever, are usually uncomfortable with such close contact and tend to back away, caus-
ing mixed interpretations of each other’s intentions.
In small groups, individuals usually try to place themselves at a comfortable con-
versational distance according to the norms of their own cultures. Naturally, this can
cause problems if the participants are members of cultures with divergent norms
about appropriate distance; they may interpret unexpected behavior of others as rude-
ness or aggressiveness. One of us had a friend from Alabama who kept moving closer
to her co-workers in Ohio, who kept backing away. Finally, they began to joke about
her “invasion of their personal space,” and both she and her co-workers learned some-
thing about their own co-cultural rules.
Females tend to sit closer than males and tolerate crowding better. People of the
same age and the same social status sit closer together than people of different ages and
statuses. The better acquainted people are, the closer they tend to sit. Thus, members of
a long-standing group characterized by high interpersonal trust would be comfortable
sitting close together in a small room, but people just beginning to form into a group
would need more space. Even so, humans are highly adaptable, so when a room or other
constraint violates our preferred distances, we adjust, at least for a short time.
A member’s status affects how others react to violations of space norms. Burgoon
et al. found, for instance, that if low-status group members violated the group’s norm
regarding space, other members saw them as less persuasive, sociable, and attractive.
In contrast, high-status members enhanced their status by moving closer than the
group norm specified, and even more if they moved farther away. Thus, it is gener-
58
ally advisable for you to follow group space norms rather than violate them, but if you
are a high-status group member, you may have some leeway.
Leadership emergence in a group is related to space. Dominant people and desig-
nated leaders usually choose central positions in the group, such as at the head of a
rectangular table or across from as many others as possible. Other members frequently
avoid sitting next to a designated leader so the arrangement looks like a leader sitting
facing a horseshoe. This reinforces the leader’s position, allows the leader a compre-
59
hensive view of the group, and facilitates the leader’s coordination and control.
People sitting across from each other speak more often to each other than people
60
sitting side by side. However, when a group has a dominating leader, “sidebar” con-
versations tend to break out between people sitting next to each other. Thus, we can
conclude that conversation normally flows across the circle, and leaders should sit
where they can maintain eye contact with as many group members as possible.

gal37018_ch02_021_050.indd 40 3/30/18 11:13 AM